Whenever there is a discussion about topics like these, there is generally the two vocal sides, the 'believers' and the 'debunkers/skeptics'. Those who are in the middle usually don't say much and probably because they haven't formed an opinion or don't know many of the facts, but regardless. I'm not new to the subject of ET's and UFO's, it's not a professional hobby, but it's a passionate hobby that I do quite a bit of reading on and sleuthing for details. It's become apparent to me now and after spending some time on this board & in this topic, some of you have done a lot more investigation on this event and know more of the facts than I do. Some of you seem to be extremely mathematically gifted and I admitted (more or less) that math isn't my strong point.

Anyway, speaking about the debunkers/skeptics, I've generally found that they are very closed to accepting things that can't be 100% explained, either by science, math or even religion and without every last 'i' dotted and 't' crossed. This doesn't just apply to this message board, it's a constant anywhere. For this group of people there is only black or white. There cannot be any unknowns and they don't seem to be willing or able to admit to grey areas. If details aren't backed and fully supported by scientific principles then the event, situation, case or phenomena is automatically bogus and case closed. Realistically our world is FULL of unknowns and science and math simply cannot definitively prove certain things.

Obviously, I am entrenched in the 'believer' camp and side of the coin. Speaking for myself, I am skeptical in my own way. I don't believe everything I read or watch and I do investigate situations in more detail than some might do. I will admit too that I also allow my gut feelings and intuition to guide my conclusions to an extent. I feel that most 'believers' have a similar mindset to mine and WITHOUT disregarding factual evidence either. Believers seem to be more willing to consider alternate ideas or theories, whereas the skeptics don't seem to be able to do this. Of course this is a generalization, but it's what I've experienced in my 38 years of life.

Alas, I also appreciate the engaging conversations about this topic. I was reluctant and unhappy to involve myself in arguing whether it was a real event or not. I HAVE learned some things about this specific event. I do believe that the one video is probably showing flares fall behind the mountains BUT, and as I maintain, I feel that that was a diversion by the military to confuse the real events of that night over Phoenix in 1997!

Regarding the reason why there were no pictures able to capture a solid craft blocking out the stars, it's probably because that level of detail wouldn't have shown up in a photo. You'd need a really good camera to even register stars on a photo first off and in a artificially bright city like Phoenix. Secondly, the witnesses said the craft was nearly the colour of the sky itself. These two factors would have not allowed this particular eye witness report detail to be seen in photos at that time, in 1997.

Could be coincidence, but sometimes if it quacks like a duck and flies like a duck....lol

1. The author had Operation Snowbird and formation flying on his mind so he thought of the Canadian Snowbird aerobatic team and used that to write-off the witness claims. After all, I tried too, to find a record that the aerobatic team had even been in the US at that time, but to no avail.
2. Possibly it was a US military pilot, realizing they had been spotted, who did indeed claim to be part of the Canadian Snowbirds using similar logic...he was part of Operation Snowbird and was flying in formation so offered a quick debunking story of his own.

Those guys are like the Thunderbirds and Blue Angels, and their purpose is to put on public airshows, which are always well advertised in advance.

I don't see them flying around at night with no flight plans, and certainly not playing tag with civilian airliners. No, something else was going on here.

Those guys are like the Thunderbirds and Blue Angels, and their purpose is to put on public airshows, which are always well advertised in advance.

I don't see them flying around at night with no flight plans, and certainly not playing tag with civilian airliners. No, something else was going on here.

That's what I mean. There's no record of the aerobatic team being there...so it's that author was making it up in order to "pad-up" his debunking story. In all likelihood that statement was never made over the radio.
And you're right about the formation flying requiring "due diligence". We used to have a large airshow every year here. I lived near the airport and used to go to a good vantage point the day before (because there were no crowds) and I would watch the airshow planes arriving. Two years running I saw the Snowbirds arrive and they were not in formation. There's 9 of them IIRC and they landed one at a time about 3-4 minutes apart. They only flew in formation during the show.

At the heart of science is an essential balance between two seemingly contradictory attitudes--an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new.
This is how deep truths are winnowed from deep nonsense. -- Carl Sagan

ahh now this is exactly why I want to know exactly what he said and when........did the words 'like private planes' or 'square wings' or even the 'make out the silohettes of the planes' come after he was shunned? did these get added to his story to make the plane scenario sound better against the avalanche of 'ufo' sightings and 'i know what I saw'........could he have seen plane lights whihc led him to believe they were planes but didnt quite realise they were military jets?

It seems to suggest that the testimony has never wavered, but that nobody seemed all that interested in following up with what he was saying. It seems that the same level of disinterest in his testimony lives on through today.

By the time that article was published near the end of June we can be sure that Jim Dilettoso and Village Labs had already undergone at least some of their investigations, but I don't know whether this was published before or after the town hall meeting previously mentioned.

At any rate, Mitch seems to me like he was a pretty down to earth and laid back guy so he might be open to answering your question directly if you can find a way to get ahold of him.

On a side note, I'm trying to keep up with the discussions but work is taking precedence. I would like to comment a bit more on several of the posts that have been made, but that may have to wait.

So if you read further in that particular link I provided, the author thinks it was some kind of exercise out of "Area 51" and Fort Huachcua, another one of those supersecret spooky type bases that are all over the Southwest.

All I can say is that the muddy waters keep getting muddier all the time, but I do believe the governor and those hundreds of other witnesses who saw something very big flying around that night.

PS In the army, Fort Huachcua had a bad reputation as the kind of base out in the middle of nowhere that no one liked to be assigned to, like Fort Bliss, and people used to grumble a lot when they got transferred there.

thanks for that....and again we have the question...was it one of ours or one of 'theirs'....

back in the 1940s, 50s, 60s(?)....this question could be answered more easily, maybe..

but by the 1990s who knows what 'we' have... and what advanced technology might be being used for..?

the general public don't know, anyway....and probably lots of military don't either (need to know and all that)

I'm not bothered if it turns out to be ours or theirs....in fact, as the waters are horribly muddied with the whole episode,

one might wonder if it was 'ours'.....using advanced technolgy...whether a cover up would be just as

thorough, if not more so.

I always kind of think that the triangle ones are more likely to be 'ours'....

the psychological experiment and/or holograph angle...is something else in the mix to consider.

The whole thing is a massive puzzle...because if it was a UFO/ET show for the public...why do this?

One thing that never varies with UFO sightings...
Always more questions than answers!

At the heart of science is an essential balance between two seemingly contradictory attitudes--an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new.
This is how deep truths are winnowed from deep nonsense. -- Carl Sagan

It's definitely a puzzle, and a lot more was going on here than "flares".

My opinion is that the big UFO first appeared appeared around Nellis Air Force Base in Las Vegas, then made its way south-southeast, where it was seen in Henderson, Boulder City and Lake Mead in Nevada, then kept flying over a lot of empty desert and was seen in Kingman and Prescott, Arizona, then of course by many people in Phoenix and Tuscon.

Whether it was one of ours or theirs is an open question in my book. Maybe it's both ours and theirs.

The big military reaction only seems to have happened in the Phoenix area, so far as I know. That's where we get all the reports of "flares", Canadian Snowbirds and blah, blah, blah, and it does seem to me that interceptors were sent up after it at some point.

It makes its way south to the Mexican border and then...what? It's gone like it never was there.

They didn't pick up anything on radar, or so they say, so does that mean it was big and stealthy? Maybe.

Regarding the reason why there were no pictures able to capture a solid craft blocking out the stars, it's probably because that level of detail wouldn't have shown up in a photo. You'd need a really good camera to even register stars on a photo first off and in a artificially bright city like Phoenix. Secondly, the witnesses said the craft was nearly the colour of the sky itself. These two factors would have not allowed this particular eye witness report detail to be seen in photos at that time, in 1997.

And because people were to staggered too do so. Don't forget that even though it was travelling slowly compared to an aircraft the whole show would have still been over in around a minute or so.

Some good posts here. Having just started reading AD After Disclosure, it is an interesting example of the corruption of language when people who believe and advocate for government stories are described as 'skeptics.'

Of course, in March 1997 the members of the Heaven's Gate UFO cult committed suicide, thinking they were going to be taken "home" on a spaceship hidden in the Hale-Bopp comet. Their suicide was ten days after the so-called "Phoenix Lights" incidents.

I would reserve the insulting term "believers" for people like these, since they really did make a religion out of UFOs, which I definitely do not.

I only knew of one person, personally who lived in the Phoenix area during the time of the 1997 sighting. I asked her about it and unfortunately she told me she was gambling at a casino during the whole thing!